Mickey Arthur knows what it means to hunt. His five years with the South Africa team were spent in pursuit. He went in search of the world No. 1 Test ranking and a major limited-overs trophy for almost that entire period and his only reward was about four months as the top Test team, a period so short few remember it.

What Arthur does not know is what it is like to be hunted. The time South Africa spent at No. 1 was never thought of as comprehensive, especially as the achievement was more a result of Australia's 2009 Ashes loss than South Africa's run of form. It came to an almost unnoticed end, so Arthur has never really known the anxiety that comes from being followed by a chasing pack.

But the South African side he built is in that position now and Arthur is the one hunting them. He thinks he knows the difference between what his former chargers and his current ones, Australia, may be feeling.

"Expectation is the biggest thing for a No. 1. When you are getting to No.1 you're always chasing a dream. And then when you're there your focus changes because the expectation to defend that title is massive," Arthur said. "It is two different mind sets.

"It probably is a little bit more difficult to adjust because every time you go out there you are expected to win. When you win, that's what you're expected to do and when you lose, people get on your back."

At least five of the players in Arthur's Australian side also know what that's about. Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke, Peter Siddle, Ben Hilfenhaus and Michael Hussy were all part of the set up when the Australians ruled the cricketing world and have made it their mission to get back there. The rest are experiencing something Arthur is all too familiar with.

"Those guys who have been there have gone back to chasing that dream again. But the new players don't know what being No. 1 is. That's a goal and a challenge that we've set for ourselves. We're also chasing."

To begin that quest against South Africa has put Arthur back into a position with which he is completely comfortable, especially because of the similarities he can draw between the two squads. "When I look at the time that Graeme [Smith] and I got together for South Africa, it was kind of the same as the time Michael and I have come together for Australia," he said. "We've both had good entrenched players and then some youngsters coming up so the journey has been the same."

Arthur could even go as far as identifying common touches in the strongly bullish Smith and the quietly classy Clarke. "Graeme is a phenomenal leader. He has an aura about him and when he talks, people listen. Michael Clarke is exactly the same. They are very similar characters and [there are] definite parallels between them. They are both very positive and lead by example. They both prepare meticulously and when they play well the teams they lead tend to be successful."

Even though Arthur is no longer part of the South Africa set-up, he appreciates how the side has grown since he left: "It is very gratifying to see that those guys have matured. They are battle-hardened players and to see the same faces here this time just means they have a lot more experience this time."

"Graeme is a phenomenal leader. He has an aura about him and when he talks, people listen. Michael Clarke is exactly the same."

Mickey Arthur

Australia shape up a little differently. While they still have the same core group, they have a few obvious softer areas, something Australians sides of old rarely spouted. The opening partnership is one of them, the injury spate another. But it is the allrounder role that Arthur seems concerned about.

"It was frustrating to lose Shane Watson, because we had been so meticulous in our planning for him," Arthur said, referring to Cricket Australia instructing Watson to return home after three Champions League T20 matches to prepare for the Test series. "We had a plan for every one of our players and to lose Watto on the eve of the series after we had done all that planning was disappointing."

A similar thing happened to Arthur four years ago. Ashwell Prince injured his hand the day before the first Test between South Africa and Australia in Perth and had to be replaced by JP Duminy on the morning of the game. South Africa went on to win that match and the series, incidents Arthur can no doubt draw inspiration from.

The success he achieved with South Africa in Australia in 2008-09 made Arthur the first coach to lead an opposition team to a series in in Australia in 15 years. Now, he may be considered in prime position to ensure South Africa do not break through again, simply because of his insider knowledge, but Arthur is not banking on that alone.

"I know the guys personally. I know exactly what makes them tick. I've seen them prepare and train, and I know what their thought processes are around the dressing room," he said. "[But] I can only prepare the players that I've got. I'm not going to influence massively what happens out in the middle.

"I do bring an intimate knowledge of the South African team. I know the little idiosyncrasies of each of them. Whether that can be used to win a Test series, I'm not sure. But I'll certainly be giving a lot of the information to our players."

look at the main photo. one of arthur's selections is looking rather depressed.

Ross_Co
on November 7, 2012, 11:25 GMT

@Gautam N. Shenoy - They get advice from members of the 'England' team.

stone-mason
on November 7, 2012, 10:44 GMT

@phapu_bhai - Suppose to you a Nissan GTR is the same as a Merc SLR (Please no jibe at Nissan, just a point). Both are good cars and in the sports catagory, however the SLR has a longer track record and has been performing consitently in its class, thus greater price tagg and value and in turn more likely to outperform contenders. Steyn in this case is the SLR, although I dont have a problem with the GTR, good and all, just not as proven as the SLR. I think Aus has advantage with Mick's in the Change Room, but equally does Saffa's as they also know what responses Micks resorts to different situations and plans he alays for his players. As a measure of advice (To ALL), dont berate players with proven track records just to aid you making a point - it says alot about your capacity to make a point and put up strong considered debate - or should I say, it doesnt say much about you. Both teams are good with the Saffa's a betterv proven quantity this time around - no use arguing that?

on November 7, 2012, 9:10 GMT

Posted by Milhouse79 ... VERY WELL SAID ,,, I AGREE 100%

LordKratos
on November 7, 2012, 7:32 GMT

What Arthur fails to understand is that the same "intimate knowledge" his has of the saffas is the same that the saffas have of him! He knows Smith just as much as Smith knows him and based on that the "advantage" that Arthur thinks he has will make for a nice egg on his face

hhillbumper
on November 6, 2012, 21:18 GMT

-given all the young bowling talent thast spends its career on the injured list and the lack of young batting talent then good luck with that

Meety
on November 6, 2012, 20:31 GMT

@Milhouse79 on (November 06 2012, 13:49 PM GMT) - perhaps you better research rankings & devise a better system. As for now, whatever #1 really means, Oz only have to win the series by 1 test, to be #1. Maybe laughable to you - but according to cricinfo - it's a fact! Who's laughing now?

subbass
on November 6, 2012, 17:54 GMT

Gave me a giggle, OZ actually think they have a chance this series. They will get hammered it's just a case of by how many. England have more chance of winning in India than OZ do of beating the saffers ! And that is saying something as I think India will win the series comfortably, probably 2-0 or 3-1.

on November 6, 2012, 15:59 GMT

Must be really hard to switch loyalties like that. I can't imagine how they do it.

Front-Foot_lunge
on November 6, 2012, 15:58 GMT

I question peoples comments about the legitimacy of Australia being number 1. England attained that position, so i don't see why Australia cant also be undeserved position holders if they regain the rank. It's not like we were at all convincing when we held the mantle, 3-0 to Pakistan comes to mind, but that didn't stop the fans and media starting every sentence with "world number 1 England cricket team..." At least Australia actually did things outside of their home grounds, drawing with SA and beating Sri Lanka.

ozwriter
on November 7, 2012, 11:58 GMT

look at the main photo. one of arthur's selections is looking rather depressed.

Ross_Co
on November 7, 2012, 11:25 GMT

@Gautam N. Shenoy - They get advice from members of the 'England' team.

stone-mason
on November 7, 2012, 10:44 GMT

@phapu_bhai - Suppose to you a Nissan GTR is the same as a Merc SLR (Please no jibe at Nissan, just a point). Both are good cars and in the sports catagory, however the SLR has a longer track record and has been performing consitently in its class, thus greater price tagg and value and in turn more likely to outperform contenders. Steyn in this case is the SLR, although I dont have a problem with the GTR, good and all, just not as proven as the SLR. I think Aus has advantage with Mick's in the Change Room, but equally does Saffa's as they also know what responses Micks resorts to different situations and plans he alays for his players. As a measure of advice (To ALL), dont berate players with proven track records just to aid you making a point - it says alot about your capacity to make a point and put up strong considered debate - or should I say, it doesnt say much about you. Both teams are good with the Saffa's a betterv proven quantity this time around - no use arguing that?

on November 7, 2012, 9:10 GMT

Posted by Milhouse79 ... VERY WELL SAID ,,, I AGREE 100%

LordKratos
on November 7, 2012, 7:32 GMT

What Arthur fails to understand is that the same "intimate knowledge" his has of the saffas is the same that the saffas have of him! He knows Smith just as much as Smith knows him and based on that the "advantage" that Arthur thinks he has will make for a nice egg on his face

hhillbumper
on November 6, 2012, 21:18 GMT

-given all the young bowling talent thast spends its career on the injured list and the lack of young batting talent then good luck with that

Meety
on November 6, 2012, 20:31 GMT

@Milhouse79 on (November 06 2012, 13:49 PM GMT) - perhaps you better research rankings & devise a better system. As for now, whatever #1 really means, Oz only have to win the series by 1 test, to be #1. Maybe laughable to you - but according to cricinfo - it's a fact! Who's laughing now?

subbass
on November 6, 2012, 17:54 GMT

Gave me a giggle, OZ actually think they have a chance this series. They will get hammered it's just a case of by how many. England have more chance of winning in India than OZ do of beating the saffers ! And that is saying something as I think India will win the series comfortably, probably 2-0 or 3-1.

on November 6, 2012, 15:59 GMT

Must be really hard to switch loyalties like that. I can't imagine how they do it.

Front-Foot_lunge
on November 6, 2012, 15:58 GMT

I question peoples comments about the legitimacy of Australia being number 1. England attained that position, so i don't see why Australia cant also be undeserved position holders if they regain the rank. It's not like we were at all convincing when we held the mantle, 3-0 to Pakistan comes to mind, but that didn't stop the fans and media starting every sentence with "world number 1 England cricket team..." At least Australia actually did things outside of their home grounds, drawing with SA and beating Sri Lanka.

Rajesh_india_1990
on November 6, 2012, 14:21 GMT

Micky arthur Dream on...southafrica all the way..:-)

Jaffa79
on November 6, 2012, 13:49 GMT

It is just laughable that the Aussies should even be thinking of themselves as a number one contender. This average skilled team of journeymen (Cowan, Quiney), T20 sloggers (Warner), has beens (Ponting and Hussey) and a host of injury prone weak players (Watson, Cummings, Harris) are at best number 5 and even that is debatable. The fact that so many Aussies on these pages are shouting up so many average players just shows you where they really are in world cricket.

OZ_CRICKETLOVER
on November 6, 2012, 12:02 GMT

AUSSIES u r always my No.1 team..

SICHO
on November 6, 2012, 11:17 GMT

@phapu_bhai- that's because you know nothing about fast bowling. So if you don't have anything to comment on just keep your post. Comparing Steyn and Starc, what a joke!!!

sawifan
on November 6, 2012, 10:55 GMT

@Pappu_bhai. No-one with any cricketing sense or knowledge could possibly call Steyn an average bowler. That would be like calling SRT an average batsman. Both statements ridiculous in their inaccuracies. Steyn's record in phenomenal, especially in the batsman orientated world of modern test cricket. As for Starc, for to early to judge on whether he is average or not. Learn to watch cricket a without your intensely subjective opinions, you'll enjoy it more.

on November 6, 2012, 10:24 GMT

Well until the deadwood is cut from the side and youth is actively rewarded Australia will continue to go backwards s and we become the worst Australian team to ever grace the world of cricket.

I believe Khawaja has the best technique at domestic level, but has been found out, just like Hughes at international level.

it would be great for the future of the sport to play Maddinson and Doolan in the team together, both players have neat records have a lot of potential and are not stop gap measures like a Quiney, Marsh or Cowan.

I believe Khawaja has the best technique at domestic level, but as we know has been found out, just like Hughes how tough it is at international level.

are all in the top 10 run scorers in the Shield season so far, there should be at least a chance that all of these guys will play for Australia

Now this is the best time to be incorporating these players

SurlyCynic
on November 6, 2012, 9:34 GMT

I think too much is made of rankings and 'mind sets'. When Aus and SA play a series the focus is just on winning, and would be the same even if they were 7 and 8 in the world.

Pappu_bhai
on November 6, 2012, 9:06 GMT

Who is better Steyn or Starc??For me both are average Bowlers.

Beertjie
on November 6, 2012, 8:39 GMT

"The time South Africa spent at No. 1 was never thought of as comprehensive, as the achievement was more a result of Australia's 2009 Ashes loss than South Africa's run of form." That's plain false! South Africa's time spent at No 1 preceded Australia's 2009 Ashes loss, so it couldn't be a result of it!

No featured comments at the moment.

Beertjie
on November 6, 2012, 8:39 GMT

"The time South Africa spent at No. 1 was never thought of as comprehensive, as the achievement was more a result of Australia's 2009 Ashes loss than South Africa's run of form." That's plain false! South Africa's time spent at No 1 preceded Australia's 2009 Ashes loss, so it couldn't be a result of it!

Pappu_bhai
on November 6, 2012, 9:06 GMT

Who is better Steyn or Starc??For me both are average Bowlers.

SurlyCynic
on November 6, 2012, 9:34 GMT

I think too much is made of rankings and 'mind sets'. When Aus and SA play a series the focus is just on winning, and would be the same even if they were 7 and 8 in the world.

on November 6, 2012, 10:24 GMT

Well until the deadwood is cut from the side and youth is actively rewarded Australia will continue to go backwards s and we become the worst Australian team to ever grace the world of cricket.

I believe Khawaja has the best technique at domestic level, but has been found out, just like Hughes at international level.

it would be great for the future of the sport to play Maddinson and Doolan in the team together, both players have neat records have a lot of potential and are not stop gap measures like a Quiney, Marsh or Cowan.

I believe Khawaja has the best technique at domestic level, but as we know has been found out, just like Hughes how tough it is at international level.

are all in the top 10 run scorers in the Shield season so far, there should be at least a chance that all of these guys will play for Australia

Now this is the best time to be incorporating these players

sawifan
on November 6, 2012, 10:55 GMT

@Pappu_bhai. No-one with any cricketing sense or knowledge could possibly call Steyn an average bowler. That would be like calling SRT an average batsman. Both statements ridiculous in their inaccuracies. Steyn's record in phenomenal, especially in the batsman orientated world of modern test cricket. As for Starc, for to early to judge on whether he is average or not. Learn to watch cricket a without your intensely subjective opinions, you'll enjoy it more.

SICHO
on November 6, 2012, 11:17 GMT

@phapu_bhai- that's because you know nothing about fast bowling. So if you don't have anything to comment on just keep your post. Comparing Steyn and Starc, what a joke!!!

OZ_CRICKETLOVER
on November 6, 2012, 12:02 GMT

AUSSIES u r always my No.1 team..

Jaffa79
on November 6, 2012, 13:49 GMT

It is just laughable that the Aussies should even be thinking of themselves as a number one contender. This average skilled team of journeymen (Cowan, Quiney), T20 sloggers (Warner), has beens (Ponting and Hussey) and a host of injury prone weak players (Watson, Cummings, Harris) are at best number 5 and even that is debatable. The fact that so many Aussies on these pages are shouting up so many average players just shows you where they really are in world cricket.

Rajesh_india_1990
on November 6, 2012, 14:21 GMT

Micky arthur Dream on...southafrica all the way..:-)

Front-Foot_lunge
on November 6, 2012, 15:58 GMT

I question peoples comments about the legitimacy of Australia being number 1. England attained that position, so i don't see why Australia cant also be undeserved position holders if they regain the rank. It's not like we were at all convincing when we held the mantle, 3-0 to Pakistan comes to mind, but that didn't stop the fans and media starting every sentence with "world number 1 England cricket team..." At least Australia actually did things outside of their home grounds, drawing with SA and beating Sri Lanka.